←back to thread

US Intel

(stratechery.com)
539 points maguay | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.046s | source
Show context
themgt ◴[] No.45026515[source]
I’ll be honest: there is a very good chance this won’t work .... At the same time, the China concerns are real, Intel Foundry needs a guarantee of existence to even court customers, and there really is no coming back from an exit. There won’t be a startup to fill Intel’s place. The U.S. will be completely dependent on foreign companies for the most important products on earth, and while everything may seem fine for the next five, ten, or even fifteen years, the seeds of that failure will eventually sprout, just like those 2007 seeds sprouted for Intel over the last couple of years. The only difference is that the repercussions of this failure will be catastrophic not for the U.S.’s leading semiconductor company, but for the U.S. itself.

Very well argued. It's such a stunning dereliction the US let things get to this point. We were doing the "pivot to Asia" over a decade ago but no one thought to find TSMC on a map and ask whether Intel was driving itself into the dirt? "For want of a nail the kingdom was lost" but in this case the nail is like your entire metallurgical industry outsourced to the territory you plan on fighting over.

replies(19): >>45026609 #>>45026778 #>>45026847 #>>45027040 #>>45027203 #>>45027671 #>>45028085 #>>45028186 #>>45029665 #>>45029679 #>>45030185 #>>45031538 #>>45032843 #>>45034153 #>>45034357 #>>45034925 #>>45035444 #>>45035539 #>>45037189 #
mvc ◴[] No.45027203[source]
If all advanced countries follow this reasoning, where does that leave us?
replies(1): >>45027509 #
minkzilla ◴[] No.45027509[source]
Robust and redundant manufacturing spread across the world with more opportunity for innovation?
replies(1): >>45027711 #
mallets ◴[] No.45027711[source]
Trillions of dollars spent just for redundancy? Most wouldn't even succeed in building a working process, forget profitable.
replies(5): >>45029013 #>>45029726 #>>45029826 #>>45031965 #>>45034302 #
1. AngryData ◴[] No.45034302[source]
Whats wrong with redundancy? Not having redundant supply of anything is a problem as human history has repeatedly shown. I think this kind of modern "more profit = more better" is just a ticking time bomb for a massive disaster, and it isn't like we haven't had any warning signs about critical supply problems for any number of resources and goods.
replies(1): >>45034961 #
2. mallets ◴[] No.45034961[source]
If you can print the money required with no bad consequences, go right ahead and build all the redundancies.

The problem with bleeding-edge fab is it's a (fast) moving target. It's not a solved problem. And customers can't simply migrate their designs to a different fab, as the designs are increasingly specific to a process.

I do think we need more fabs but not this kind. Very low cost fabs with standardized PDK and open(ish) tools, should be as simple as ordering a PCB. Not going to happen anytime soon though, needs old fabs to stop production and the bleeding-edge to hit a hard wall. Can't compete with fully depreciated legacy fabs/nodes.